Real world HP

limey66 · Mar 31, 2005

A couple of days ago, BC (Before Crash), there was a discussion going on about how much HP a certain setup would make. The guy's set up was a little modded from stock, but the estimated RWHP was disappointingly low.

I've got a standard 289 with 2 barrel carb, just as the factory made it. 200hp is the quoted figure - what am I really going to see at the rear wheels in bhp?

Be gentle with me.

Stang_1973 · Mar 31, 2005

prolly like 150.

302 coupe · Mar 31, 2005

140-ish if its in tune.....

STSFCTN67 · Mar 31, 2005

To give you an example of the difference in old school horsepower figures versus new, back in 1990 in Louisiana I had my first 67 "c code" coupe with a completly rebuilt 289. It had a slightly bigger cam than stock, Performer intake, 600 Carter, no headers but dual exhaust, and it had a 4speed with 3.00 gears. It was a Sprint Special. A friend of mine had a bone stock Mustang SVO rated at 200 hp. All I can say is that it was embarrasing getting smoked by a 4cyl. From a standstill from a roll you name it, he just walked all over me. There is a big difference between the two horsepower figures.

Vinyl66 · Mar 31, 2005

The general consensus for the RWHP on that car a few days ago was around 150-175 HP. That was with several bolt on modifications and a 4 barrel carb.
I would say your stock 2 barrel engine would be in the low 100 range to the rear wheels. Guessing 125-135.
Previous poster was correct in saying the way HP used to be measured (gross HP) is WAY off the mark as compared to today. Your engine made 200HP stock with no power steering, alternator, water pump, etc. I think the exhaust was opened up as well on the dyno (not full length). Add to that the drivetrain loss going through an automatic transmission and rearend and you get some awfully low RWHP #'s. Sad but true.

coolblue65 · Mar 31, 2005

Well here are some actual numbers from a stock 2 barrel 289 (with single exhuast I believe) that was at my Mustang clubs dyno day:

'66 Stang -coupe (stock 289-2bl) 121 HP 217 TQ

TQ seems high-we were all quite surprised with that number.

BrownPSU78 · Mar 31, 2005

coolblue65 said:
...'66 Stang -coupe (stock 289-2bl) 121 HP 217 TQ...

You use the car to tow correct??

--Brown

coolblue65 · Mar 31, 2005

BrownPSU78 said:
You use the car to tow correct??

--Brown

Those numbers are not from my car.

Jonstantine · Apr 1, 2005

STSFCTN67 said:
To give you an example of the difference in old school horsepower figures versus new, back in 1990 in Louisiana I had my first 67 "c code" coupe with a completly rebuilt 289. It had a slightly bigger cam than stock, Performer intake, 600 Carter, no headers but dual exhaust, and it had a 4speed with 3.00 gears. It was a Sprint Special. A friend of mine had a bone stock Mustang SVO rated at 200 hp. All I can say is that it was embarrasing getting smoked by a 4cyl. From a standstill from a roll you name it, he just walked all over me. There is a big difference between the two horsepower figures.

that doesnt sound right at all
must have been a real small cam, or my headers help more than i think...

limey66 · Apr 1, 2005

coolblue65 said:
...'66 Stang -coupe (stock 289-2bl) 121 HP...

NUTS.

I get that from my daily driver turbodiesel Mondeo.

I think I'll stick a 150 hp shot of nitrous into it...

Real world HP

limey66

Member

Stang_1973

302 coupe

STSFCTN67

Member

Vinyl66

Member

coolblue65

BrownPSU78

Active Member

coolblue65

Jonstantine

limey66

Member

Similar threads

Real world HP

Member

Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency